live_clip_duplicate_to_arrangement

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral traits. It only says 'Duplicate', which is ambiguous (copy vs move). It omits details like effects on original clip, handling of existing arrangement clips, or the asynchronous nature implied by the timeout parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence, appropriate in length, but it sacrifices necessary detail. While not verbose, it is under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters and nested objects.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely lacking. It fails to explain parameter roles, behavior of duplication, error conditions, or relationship to other tools, making it incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 20% (only timeout has description). The tool description does not explain any parameter meanings beyond their names, such as what track/clip objects require (path/id), destination_time format, or expected_set_signature purpose, leaving the agent with incomplete semantic information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action 'Duplicate a Session clip to Arrangement on a target track', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like live_clip_add_notes or live_track_create_audio_clip by specifying the unique duplication from Session to Arrangement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for copying a Session clip to Arrangement on a specific track, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor prerequisites or constraints like requiring the clip to be in Session view.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.